Biosocial Perspectives on Deviance

The study of biological influences on human behavior has been met with opposition by social scientists for decades. Recently, this has changed and biosocial perspectives on crime and deviance have gained momentum and more acceptance as an interdisciplinary perspective, but not a theory, that incorporates ideas and science from genetics, neuroscience, sociology, criminology, and developmental psychology. This perspective calls for theorizing and research on deviance by combining biological and environmental explanations in ways that do not exclude or devalue one or the other.

Current biosocial research on criminal and deviant behavior encompasses explorations of prenatal and perinatal development, brain functioning, and evolution. This entry provides an accessible summary of contemporary research on genetics and human behavior among biosocial researchers. Following a brief introductory discussion of some of the history and common myths regarding biological explanations of crime and deviant behaviors, the entry then focuses on recent research on genetics and criminality, as well as the methods and frameworks used to guide this research. The entry concludes with a summary of progress made in biosocial criminology and the policy concerns underlying these efforts.

Much of the skepticism and contention directed toward the biology of human behavior stems, in part, from early eugenics research that focused on the purported biological inferiority of particular ethnic and racial groups in society. A century ago, some eugenicists thought that the way to prevent crime and build a better society was to reduce the likelihood of breeding among criminals, racial and ethnic minorities, and those possessing inherent traits such as low intelligence. Many scientists participating in the eugenics movement were dedicated to the improvement of the human race through sterilizing and eliminating individuals who were considered inferior. This movement has produced an everlasting scar on society and the social science community, leading some social scientists to dismiss the fact that biological factors do influence complex human behaviors and to subscribe to common myths that biosocial research necessarily promotes genetic determinism and racially driven eugenics policies.

The new generation of biosocial criminologists does not endorse the same ideas, political agenda, or crime prevention strategies contained in early biological theories promoted by many eugenics researchers. The biosocial approach we describe acknowledges the fact that social environments are important for understanding crime and related behaviors, and researchers who adopt this orientation develop research questions and conduct studies on human behavior that allow for the complex interplay between nature and nurture. Unfortunately, the same is not true for sociological explanations of criminal and deviant behaviors that have dominated criminological research for many decades and almost exclusively relied on environmental or socialization explanations of individuals or groups to explain involvement in crime and delinquency.

Sociological research on criminal and deviant behavior employs standard social science methodologies (SSSMs) to test theories that almost exclusively provide environment-based propositions. SSSMs are used mostly to examine samples of subjects, where one individual per household was selected for study, and then to empirically assess how variability among individuals' social situations (e.g., family, peers, school attachment, etc.) are related to their involvement in delinquency and criminal involvement. By doing so, these methods often neglect or ignore genetic contributions to the outcome of interest. Consequentially, findings from such studies will likely provide inflated estimates of the relationship between social factors and delinquency and criminal involvement.

...